In a heavy moment, a colleague of mine observed that spring is finally here, but none of us can enjoy it. This comment is one of many made over these past weeks about our new life. Our businesses are closed; our elderly are hiding; our colleagues are on the front lines and at risk. And, yes, the simple pleasure of enjoying a spring day – the warmth in the air, the song of the birds – has been lost, at least for now.

This week’s Reading has three selections, and each touches on the intersection between the pandemic and mental health care. Our new life means new challenges as we attempt to deliver mental health care services.

In the first selection, we consider a paper on COVID and serious mental illness. In a JAMA Psychiatry paper, Dr. Benjamin G. Druss (of Emory University) writes: “Disasters disproportionately affect poor and vulnerable populations, and patients with serious mental illness may be among the hardest hit.”

What is the role of mental health care during this pandemic? In the second selection, we consider a new Lancet Psychiatry editorial. The editors write: “Although the mental health field’s interest in trauma has greatly expanded in recent decades, our scientific understanding of trauma has lagged far behind, including our understanding of its definition and aetiology, and, importantly, of how to effectively intervene.”

Finally, in the third selection, we look at a letter by Dr. Yuncheng Zhu (of Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine) and his co-authors. They discuss inpatient care and the risk and prevention of infection. “Panic is inevitable among patients and medical staff and timely mental health care for dealing with the novel coronavirus outbreak is urgently needed.”

Statistically, people with major mental illness have a life expectancy that is decades shorter than those without. Not only is that gap significant, but it may be growing. In a 2013 paper, drawing on Danish data, Nielsen et al. showed that the expansion of life expectancy seen in the general population over the past 30 years hasn’t been enjoyed by those with schizophrenia.

Why the gap? And what can be done? A major new paper in JAMA Psychiatry considers the treatment of myocardial infarction. Like Nielsen et al., Aalborg University’s Pirathiv Kugathasan and his co-authors use Danish national databases. They focus on the use (or lack of use) of cardioprotective medications, like statins, after MI. Interestingly, they find that when people with schizophrenia have cardioprotective medications, they can match the outcomes of those without mental illness.

Is heart health the way to address the gap?

In this week’s Reading, we consider the Kugathasan et al. paper, as well as the accompanying editorial. Then we consider the big question: what can be done?